* Ossama Othman:
Something like the following should be a good smoke test:
class Foo
{
public:
Foo (void) : bar_ (0) { }
virtual ~Foo (void) { }
virtual int bar (void) { return this-bar_; }
private:
int bar_;
};
int main (int, char *[])
{
On Feb 15, 2000, Ossama Othman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Alexandre,
On Tue, Feb 15, 2000 at 11:10:40AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Feb 12, 2000, Ossama Othman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it's bad idea to check for bool and/or if __cplusplus is
defined since some C compilers
Hi Olly,
On Tue, Feb 15, 2000 at 03:22:49AM +, Olly Betts wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ossama Othman writes:
Something like the following should be a good smoke test:
class Foo
{
public:
Foo (void) : bar_ (0) { }
virtual ~Foo (void) { }
virtual int bar
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Morten Eriksen wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Olly Betts) writes:
Also might it not be better to try each compiler in the list which
exists in turn and using the first working one, rather than just
trying the first compiler which exists?
The problem with this is that
--- Olly Betts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-8-
If I'm going to rewrite it (nobody's objected yet, so I guess I will),
I can incorporate this knowledge. So far I think we have:
* "CC" is an unwise choice for DOS/Windows (not a problem if we check
that the compiler groks C++ so we can ignore
